Showing headlines posted by schestowitz

Watch the BBC getting grilled at the Parliament over its blind servitude to Microsoft, which it simply cannot defend

Microsoft Corporation is suddenly inviting all people behind ODF to 'pull a Patrick Durusau' and come to Microsoft's turf.

Some believe that he idea of the Novell/Microsoft agreement came from IBM and Oracle. They went to Novell with the following plan: Microsoft would be very much interested in two things with Novell: polluting/diluting the Linux brand and message (Microsoft could also have a dent in the Linux market). This is always overlooked,

The One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project -- which aimed to give underprivileged children around the world a better chance at modern education -- may have been stifled though a combination of disinformation and other coordinated efforts by hardware and software monopolies that wanted to stop it.

Microsoft's strategy goes like this: invade open source, redefine open source, make open source work better on Windows, force open source to 'license' for software patents

The intra-governmental aspect of this may spur the network effect. Slovakia has already shown it was fond of ODF some time in the past.

As some people here probably already know, I am no fan of Mono - not for technical reasons (mostly [3]), but simply for political ones. Specifically, I’m talking about so-called Software Patents, and even more importantly, precisely who owns those patents

Do consider asking your national standards body to join the complaint of South Africa. [...] This opportunity to stop or slow down OOXML is rare and the days that are left to do so are few. We ought to take advantage of this while it lasts.

Despite recession, the finding seems to suggest that the pace of obligatorily-disclosed amounts now trivially exceeds $10 million for Microsoft alone (annually).

Now get a load of this. The only sponsor of SourceForge.net2008 Community Choice Awards is Microsoft. Yes, you heard that right.

MySQL is likely to face issues that are associated with ways of extracting revenue from its users. Another largely forgotten issue is the increased pressure from the outside to extract revenue for collisions involving ideas, especially ones pertaining to algorithms.

There was clearly a transaction of money made by Microsoft in Norway, which passed it on to ISO. Good catch. Watch the picture inside this page and recall our old entry about soft briberies.

Some have voiced concern at Red Hat’s move to deemphasize the desktop, yet it’s a strategy that should be seen in a larger context.

Yes, Microsoft wants to “find ways to split ‘em apart.” Microsoft needs to do some intelligence work to identify “sources of tension between allies.” BSD versus GPL, anyone?

Novell carries on assisting Microsoft's fight against a member of the Linux Foundation (Adobe) by promoting an anti-Linux, anti-GPL Silverlight

Just days after accusations had been made against IBM and a ban put in place, IBM was cleared of all charges and the ban was lifted. The Register was quick with its report and so was The Inquirer. [...] As you can trivially find in the latest news, the whole accusation turns out to be some kind of a horrible mistake that no-one understand (total bafflement) and it’s worth stressing that the timing was interesting — almost as interesting as those responses from Microsoft apologists who defended Microsoft’s actions by wrongly accusing IBM.

“Microsoft did sponsor the benchmark testing and the NT server was better tuned than the Linux one. Having said that, I must say that I still trust the Windows NT server would have outperformed the Linux one.” –Windows platform manager, Microsoft South-Africa

There is enormous overlapping jurisdiction between national standardization body responsibilities and those of antitrust regulators. There is a pretty fair argument that JTC 1 should put DIS-29500 on ice until the antitrust proceeding is concluded, in order to avoid the possibility of inconsistent decisions.

Let us quickly accumulate pointers to posts which summarise the problem and use this page as somewhat an index that makes it easy to understand for those unfamiliar with it.

To sum up, not a single “Yes” voter was not in Microsoft’s pocket. Is this voting? Microsoft virtually had 5 seats. It holds them by the money, the mutual favours, the incentives, the personal relationships. Shouldn’t an impartial panel be deciding on OOXML, based on the technical quality of the candidate alone?